Either antinatalism is futile in long run, or it is existential threat.
If we assume that antinatalism is rational, then in long run it will lead to reduction of part of human population, that is capable/trained to do rational decisions, thus making antinatalists’ efforts futile. As we can see, people that should be most susceptible to antinatalism don’t even consider this option (en masse at least). And given their circumstances they have clear reason for that: every extra child makes it less likely for them to starve to death in old age, as more children more chances for family to control more resources. It is big prisoner dilemma, where defectors win.
Edit: Post-humans are not considered. They will have other means to acquire resources.
Edit: My point: antinatalism can be rational for individuals, but it cannot be rational for humankind to accept (even if it is universally true as antinatalists claim).
Either antinatalism is futile in long run, or it is existential threat.
If we assume that antinatalism is rational, then in long run it will lead to reduction of part of human population, that is capable/trained to do rational decisions, thus making antinatalists’ efforts futile. As we can see, people that should be most susceptible to antinatalism don’t even consider this option (en masse at least). And given their circumstances they have clear reason for that: every extra child makes it less likely for them to starve to death in old age, as more children more chances for family to control more resources. It is big prisoner dilemma, where defectors win.
Edit: Post-humans are not considered. They will have other means to acquire resources.
Edit: My point: antinatalism can be rational for individuals, but it cannot be rational for humankind to accept (even if it is universally true as antinatalists claim).